1896.] D. Prain — Two additional species of h^^.gotis. 59 



the subjoined key these forms have accordingly been given specific 

 rank. 



The genus Lagotis was founded by Gaertner in 1770 {Nov. Comm. Acad. Petrop. 

 xiv., pt. i., p. 533, t. xviii., f. 2) on a plant from Kamtschafcka described by Gmelin 

 {Flor. Sihir. in. 219) in 1768 as a Veronica. A somewhat different form of the same 

 species collected by Pallas was described by that author in \776 (Reise Prov. Rass. 

 Reichs. in. 710, t. A, fig, 1) as Gymnandra horealis. The younger Linnseus united 

 these two plants and referred them in 1781 to the genus Bartsia (Bartsia Gymnan- 

 dra Linn.f. Suppl. Plant. 278); in this he was followed by Willdenow in 1800 (Sp. 

 PI. ed. iv. iii. 186), and by Pursh in 1814 {Flor. Amer. Septen. ii. 430). Lamarck, in 

 the French edition of Pallas (1793), referred the species of this genus to Paederota. 



In 1811, however, Willdenow {Gesell. Naturf. Freunde Berlin Mag. v. p. 390 

 et seq.) recognised the right to separate generic rank of the plants mentioned ; for some 

 reason Willdenow chose to employ the name Gymnandra of Pallas in preference 

 to the older name Lagotis of Gaertner, being followed in this by Chamisso and 

 Schlechtendal who monographed the genus in 1827 (Linnasa ii. p. 560, et seq.) ; by 

 Choisy who monographed it again in 1848 (DC Prodr. xii., 24 et seq.) ; by Ledebour 

 who described the Russian species in 1849 {Flor. Ross. iii. 331, et seq.) and by 

 Boissier who described the Oriental species in 1879 {Flor. Orient, iv. 527j. Endlicher 

 too in 1838 {Gen. Plant. 689) ; Meisner, between 1836-43 {Gen. Plant, i. 307, ii. 218) ; 

 and Bentham and Hooker in 1876 {Gen. Plant, ii. 1129) used by preference the 

 name Gymnandra. Dr. Ruprecht had endeavoured in 1845 {Flor. Samojed. Cis. 49) 

 and again in 1870 {Sert. Tianschan. 64) to re-establish the true name ; but it was 

 not till 1881, that the indefensible usage was formally discredited at the instance 

 of Mr. Maximowicz who, in his paper referred to above, restored the name 

 Lagotis. In this he has been followed by Mr. Rolfe \_Journ. Linn. Soc. xx. 349 

 (1884)] and by Sir Joseph Hooker in the Flora of British India, vol. iv ; it is therefore 

 to be hoped that the name Gymnandra may not re-appear in future lists. 



Willdenow in his revision of 1811 recognised as many as eight species, all 

 of which he figured ; Chamisso and Schlechtendal, however, reduced these to 

 three ; in this they were followed by Choisy in his monograph. Maximowicz whose 

 treatment touches, perhaps, the opposite extreme, reduced all of them to L. glauca. 

 The writer's treatment differs slightly from that of all the authors mentioned ; it 

 recognises but two species in the group of forms figured by Willdenow, though it 

 approaches that of Chamisso and of Choisy since one of the two species recognised 

 admits of division into two varieties. 



For convenience of consultation these reductions are here shown in tabular form. 



